Slashdot Mirror


Trump Nominates Lawyer To Lead FBI (bbc.com)

President Donald Trump announced via Twitter on Wednesday that he has chosen a new FBI director. Trump says he's nominating Christopher A. Wray for the position. He described Wray as "a man of impeccable credentials." From a report: Donald Trump says he is nominating lawyer Christopher A Wray who served under George W Bush. Wray more recently represented the New Jersey governor, Chris Christie, during the investigation into the George Washington Bridge lane-closing case, in which two of Christie's former aides were convicted of plotting to close lanes of the bridge to punish a Democratic mayor who wouldn't endorse the governor. Christie, who has informally advised the president, was not charged in the case.

Wray would succeed James Comey, whom Trump fired last month amid mounting scrutiny of ties between his campaign and Russia. The announcement comes a day ahead of Comey's scheduled appearance before the Senate intelligence committee on Thursday where he is expected to touch on his firing and claims that Trump asked him to soft-pedal the investigation into former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn.

17 of 368 comments (clear)

  1. Re:"mounting scrutiny of ties" by Carewolf · · Score: 4, Informative

    "mounting scrutiny of ties between his campaign and Russia."

    Reminder, no such ties have been shown to actually exist.

    Posting as AC because the last time I went against the Conspiracy Theories someone decided to call my boss and claim I was destroying America.

    Ehmm? There are plenty of evidence and the administration have even acknowledged it and fired the people. What open is whether Trump was aware of it, or if it was only his most trusted and most prominent leaders of his campaign that colluded with the Russians.

  2. Re:"mounting scrutiny of ties" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Jeff session was part of the trump campaign and used trump campaign finances to meet with the russian ambassador, then lied about it under oath, and on government documents.

    Manford had russian connections and ran the trump campaign.

    Kushner met with the same russian ambassador several times while working on the campaign and doesn't have access to Jeff sessions excuse that he was doing it as a representative of the senate and used the wrong bank account (and no other senator on the same committees he is on has ever had to meet with the russian ambassador or knows why sessions would be meeting with the russian ambassador...).

    Trump himself asked russia to locate emails from hillary clinton's servers on public broadcast television.

    The ties have been proven. The legality of the ties are in question.

    Please consider using reality as a measuring stick of what is true and what is false in the future this fantasy world you are living in with Mr Trump isn't going to change what the investigations that are happening in reality find.

  3. Re:"mounting scrutiny of ties" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Off the top of my head... Kushner, Sessions, Flynn, (maybe) Manafort.
    There are others of course... but those are the biggies, so far.

    Sessions lied about it under oath and on government documents... perjury is criminal.
    Flynn had connections he lied about, and committed tax fraud to hide the money, criminal.
    Kushner tried to setup backchannels to avoid having the US intelligence agencies listen in to what was being said, which might not be criminal in and of itself, but it leads to a significant amount of questions when you are trying to hide something from the people who are policing you.
    Manafort of course was under investigation for money he received from russia...

    So two clearly criminal cases to be made, and two where an investigation is ongoing, and we don't know what all evidence there is, yet.

  4. Re: "mounting scrutiny of ties" by Lisandro · · Score: 3, Informative

    "This man has served for many years, he's a general, he's a â" in my opinion â" a very good person. I believe that it would be very unfair to hear from somebody who we don't even know and immediately run out and fire a general."

    - guess who

  5. Translation by sjbe · · Score: 4, Informative

    He described Wray as "a man of impeccable credentials.

    Translation: "He is loyal to Trump"

  6. Re:"mounting scrutiny of ties" by squiggleslash · · Score: 5, Informative

    By the time of the election Flynn was (and still is) hated by the Washington establishment, I can't even begin to imagine why you'd suggest otherwise. As far as his involvement in Trump's campaign goes, he may or may not have been involved organizationally, but he was absolutely a top supporter of Trump and at one point was being seriously considered as Trump's VP pick. He made numerous appearances for Trump at Trump's campaign rallies.

    The implication he was somehow forced on an unwilling Trump is absurd. Trump didn't even want to fire him, and has been defending him in public even after Flynn was gone.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  7. Re:Lawyer by hey! · · Score: 5, Informative

    I actually looked the guy up and he does have some of the typical background for the job, having worked in the US attorneys' office and DOJ for about eight years.

    That's a little thin compared to Comey's 18 years of public service before nomination, or Mueller's 15 years. Louis Freeh was an actual FBI agent for six years, followed by ten years as a prosecutor and two as a federal judge.

    So given that his relevant experience is a bit thin by recent standards, why Wray? Probably because he's willing to do the job under circumstances. As to whether his personal loyalty to the President will be greater than Comey's, that only people who know him could say.

    If the President is relying solely on the fact that Wray represented Chris Christie in a case where Christie was widely viewed as having abused his executive power, well then the President would be a fool. Smart lawyers understand where their duty lies. When their defending a client it's to the client. But while an FBI director works under the president, he's not the president's personal lawyer; his duty is to the country.

    We'll have to watch the confirmation hearings to get a sense of who this guy is.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  8. Re: "mounting scrutiny of ties" by Lisandro · · Score: 4, Informative

    FYI, this was stated *after* he fired him,not before.

  9. Re: "mounting scrutiny of ties" by Lisandro · · Score: 5, Informative

    He seems awfully apologetic for a guy supposedly fired for lyring to the Vicepresident.

    Also, seriously? Trump, who has no reservations in publicly shitting anyone he doesn't like, consequences be damned, treats his former NSA with kids gloves only because the globalist elite told him so? And lets not forget, Flynn was disliked by pretty much everyone in DC. At one point even Obama told Trump no to hire the guy, for pete's sake.

  10. Lawyer by Train0987 · · Score: 2, Informative

    FBI agents must have a law degree. Why is it unusual that the FBI Director might be a lawyer. Is that supposed to be something negative?

  11. Re: Trump 2020 by Lord+Kano · · Score: 3, Informative

    Don't be so sure. I was under the impression that nominating him last year was a guaranteed way to lose.

    I completely underestimated how terrible of a candidate the DNC would choose.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  12. Re: Trump 2020 by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Informative

    I completely underestimated how terrible of a candidate the DNC would choose.

    Yep. When it became clear that the populace supported Sanders, then it seemed like Trump would lose. But when the DNC made it clear that they weren't going to let us have Sanders, then it seemed like Trump could win. And then he did.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  13. Fake News! by s.petry · · Score: 4, Informative

    James Comey is also a Lawyer, who practiced Law and worked for the DOJ prior to heading the FBI. Prior to Comey, we had Robert Mueller who was also a Lawyer and also worked for the DOJ. Pickard who served a whole 71 days was not an attorney, but prior to him Louis Freeh was.. can you guess? An Attorney.

    In fact, why not run through the list and see how many FBI directors were of all things, a "Lawyer". The only reason for this thread to make it to the front page is for clickbait and post count. It is not a "story", and not "news"

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  14. Re:"mounting scrutiny of ties" by HornWumpus · · Score: 1, Informative

    Trump himself asked russia to locate emails from hillary clinton's servers on public broadcast television.

    After the servers were down and Hillary had stonewalled on providing the data to the FBI.

    I don't care who has the emails. They should post them for the world to read.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  15. Re:Lawyer by Khyber · · Score: 4, Informative

    Fucking wrong. From the FBI site:

    "Educational requirements include having a four year bachelor degree from an accredited university or college. In addition to this applicants should have three years of work experience at the minimum."

    No where is a law degree stated as the qualifier. I'm sure they'd prefer a law degree or a degree in "Criminal Justice" but they've got plenty of other degree-holders outside of law handling other things, like Comp. Sci/Engineering degree holders doing digital forensics.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  16. Re:"mounting scrutiny of ties" by Mashiki · · Score: 2, Informative

    No, it wasn't "his job". No one on the foreign relations committee meets with ambassadors

    You're repeating bullshit, sounds like you're a paid troll, maybe for Claire McCaskill. Yet another member of of the "foreign relations committee" who's met with multiple ambassadors including the russian amabassador, and french, and british, and german. Oh would you look at that? I guess we'd better start an indepth investigation to see if McCaskill is actually a russian agent. It would be such a shame for the democrats if that was to happen wouldn't it....

    Then again this appears to be a much bigger scandal. Especially since Debbie Wasserman Schultz threatened the capital police and tried to directly interfere with a criminal investigation. Oh boy, just what have the democrats really gotten themselves into...

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  17. Re:"mounting scrutiny of ties" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Except it wasn't his job, he acts as a member of a committee, he doesn't get to act alone for such meetings, and none of the committee members knew about it, or knew why he was going to such a meeting.

    And even if it WAS his job, he can spend money from his JOB instead of the TRUMP CAMPAIGN to travel to the meeting.

    And even if he did screw up and use the wrong account for reimbursement (which has it's own legal ramification of misuse of campaign funds), lieing about it under oath was certainly not part of his job... nor was falsifying government documents.